I introduce the Honda V8... splooge
ITR prick #1...
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,414
Likes: 0
From: 757...804...215...727??!?
Re: I introduce the Honda V8... splooge
Originally Posted by Iceman05
any idea on the lifespan of that motor? i cant imagine a 590hp 4l motor lasting 150k+ miles....
i dunno....a lot of it depends on how a motor is treated. you keep up with maintenance, baby it, itll last a lot longer than if you dont pay attention to what the motor needs and redline it all the time.
Last edited by boostjunkie; Jan 22, 2005 at 06:22 AM.
Thread Starter
DAAAANG & OHDAANG
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,441
Likes: 0
From: va beach, va
Re: I introduce the Honda V8... splooge
Originally Posted by Shawn
Yes, in 1994-1995 the mustang could barely squeek out a 14.9 stock. Name one import of equal or lesser value that could do that. In 1995, that was fairly impressive.
dude, crx's in 89' were making 170 horsepower out of 1.6 liters FACTORY, running 14 second times. my only argument is that STOCK american made V8's are not impressive unless your talking like a z06 or some shit. its like david and goliath. if goliath would have killed david would any of us have ever heard that story?? no.
Srsly.
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 14,449
Likes: 0
From: Kalamazoo
Re: I introduce the Honda V8... splooge
Originally Posted by Shawn
HP/Liter is useless to me. I dont understand why everyone gets their panties in a bunch because V8's dont make as much HP per liter as a b16 or whatever. HP/Liter doesnt win any races.
Yes, in 1994-1995 the mustang could barely squeek out a 14.9 stock. Name one import of equal or lesser value that could do that. In 1995, that was fairly impressive. Now, the 99+ mustangs are knocking down high 13 second times bone stock, with the 05 GT's down in the low 13 second range for some people. Cobras are in the mid 12s from the factory floor, LS1's were running high 12's back in 1998 off the showroom floor. I guess since people compare newer cars to older models and think its fair, then the Supra must be a shitty car right? I mean, it only ran what mid 13s?
Besides, just because a manufacture rated a motor at a certain hp doesnt mean that that is always true. LS1's were rated at 300bhp, and then 310bhp. They routinely break 300whp, which if you calculate 15% drivetrain loss, is 345bhp. Same with 03 Cobras, which have put down anywhere from 365whp at the lowest up to 390whp, all completely stock, which puts the motor at 420bhp to 450bhp, whereas the b16 puts down 130whp(?) stock, giving it a whopping 150bhp if paired through the same drivetrain loss (which is usually less for FWD cars, but we'll worry about that later.)
Now lets do some hp/liter calculations from that
345bhp/5.7l = 60.5hp/l
420bhp/4.6l = 91.3hp/l
450bhp/4.6l = 97.8hp/l
150bhp/1.6l = 93.8hp/l
The s2000 i will give credit for having an insane hp/liter.
220bhp/2.0l = 109.3hp/l
These are all based on real wheel hp figures + 15%, so they're far more accurate than a manufacturer's rating.
Either way you cut it, hp/liter doesnt mean shit unless you're racing in a class that has a limit on displacement.
Yes, in 1994-1995 the mustang could barely squeek out a 14.9 stock. Name one import of equal or lesser value that could do that. In 1995, that was fairly impressive. Now, the 99+ mustangs are knocking down high 13 second times bone stock, with the 05 GT's down in the low 13 second range for some people. Cobras are in the mid 12s from the factory floor, LS1's were running high 12's back in 1998 off the showroom floor. I guess since people compare newer cars to older models and think its fair, then the Supra must be a shitty car right? I mean, it only ran what mid 13s?
Besides, just because a manufacture rated a motor at a certain hp doesnt mean that that is always true. LS1's were rated at 300bhp, and then 310bhp. They routinely break 300whp, which if you calculate 15% drivetrain loss, is 345bhp. Same with 03 Cobras, which have put down anywhere from 365whp at the lowest up to 390whp, all completely stock, which puts the motor at 420bhp to 450bhp, whereas the b16 puts down 130whp(?) stock, giving it a whopping 150bhp if paired through the same drivetrain loss (which is usually less for FWD cars, but we'll worry about that later.)
Now lets do some hp/liter calculations from that
345bhp/5.7l = 60.5hp/l
420bhp/4.6l = 91.3hp/l
450bhp/4.6l = 97.8hp/l
150bhp/1.6l = 93.8hp/l
The s2000 i will give credit for having an insane hp/liter.
220bhp/2.0l = 109.3hp/l
These are all based on real wheel hp figures + 15%, so they're far more accurate than a manufacturer's rating.
Either way you cut it, hp/liter doesnt mean shit unless you're racing in a class that has a limit on displacement.
ITR prick #1...
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,414
Likes: 0
From: 757...804...215...727??!?
Re: I introduce the Honda V8... splooge
Originally Posted by Shawn
I guess since people compare newer cars to older models and think its fair, then the Supra must be a shitty car right? I mean, it only ran what mid 13s?
there are a lot of people that talk shit about supras....cause they tend to trap high as shit and run about a second slower than their trap should dictate.
i personally would shit myself if i owned a supra.
i drive autobahn
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
From: RIchmond
Re: I introduce the Honda V8... splooge
so ugly so stupid, so rice, defenition of GAY, i hate bubbly body style, why the fuck wouldnt they have used an nsx body or somehthing that atleast looked sexy?
Registered member
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,781
Likes: 0
From: Oahu, HI
Re: I introduce the Honda V8... splooge
Originally Posted by Porsche_911
so ugly so stupid, so rice, defenition of GAY, i hate bubbly body style, why the fuck wouldnt they have used an nsx body or somehthing that atleast looked sexy?
Thread Starter
DAAAANG & OHDAANG
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,441
Likes: 0
From: va beach, va
Re: I introduce the Honda V8... splooge
Originally Posted by Porsche_911
so ugly so stupid, so rice, defenition of GAY, i hate bubbly body style, why the fuck wouldnt they have used an nsx body or somehthing that atleast looked sexy?
your an idiot
FUCKIN MAGNETS
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 22,585
Likes: 0
From: Norfolk
Re: I introduce the Honda V8... splooge
Originally Posted by MattnTheHATch
dude, crx's in 89' were making 170 horsepower out of 1.6 liters FACTORY, running 14 second times. my only argument is that STOCK american made V8's are not impressive unless your talking like a z06 or some shit. its like david and goliath. if goliath would have killed david would any of us have ever heard that story?? no.
http://www.crxsi.com/specs.htm
That website there lists the best time as a 16.2. Considering all america got was a CRX Si with a d16 as the best motor ( a whopping 108hp, woop dee doo), you're completely incorrect. If you wanna get technical, in 1987, CARS magazine got a completely stock LX mustang to run a 13.8@100mph.
Who gives a shit how small your motor is. If you show me a 14 second timeslip beating a 20 year old mustang, i'm not gonna care. Hell 13 seconds isnt fast, so chances are I wont care about that either.
